To go completely back onto topic. I played this game and I thought the dumbest part was the ending and the boss fight. Its like fighting a big spider while on LSD, not to mention the subtlety gets completely trashed in the 10th or so chapter. I mean once he started swinging a katana around I know it had departed horror completely. Though still a good game and a great review.

again not really a review...funny (leper joke cracked me up)...but a rant at best...he spoiled part of the plot (also funny)for jebus sake...told us there was a path in the woods we need to find and then you get killed (scary for some but still another spoiler)...i could go on...i love the series...i think yahtzee is brilliant...but these are not reviews...did he even say if he liked it as much a silent hill 4 or whatever

I belive the problem is how he acts/presents his reviews, wich make people take it seriously. Also on how he always claims that he's a pro reviewer, plus I woulden't even consider him as an entertainer since he bassicly fails at that as well.

That's kind of the point.What helps make his style is the profound sense of arrogance that he brings to it.

Obviously it won't be everyone's cup of tea.No one entertainer is going to please the masses.But that doesn't mean that he's any less of one for it.

Just read through his threads and see all the people who have enjoyed his videos.Dispensing bile as a response to bile is only adding to the mess.

Agreed, I just don't find alot of humor in this (a chuckel one or two maybe.) Some people do yes, but it's annoying when they go on this protection of yahtzee calling him some sort of humor God and reviewer, wich he ain't and never was/will be. Plus I kinda have a feeling that he hasn't even played the original Siren on the PS2, wich by far was HORRENDESLY bad, and practically impossible to pass without a walktrough. Just because he mentioned it, doesn't mean he played it. The only thing I'd agree with him, was the voice acting, wich was badly translated from the Japanese. The othere things he said sucked can be countered by bringing the Siren for the PS2.

In my honest opinion, no game has made horror/psychological thriller GOOD. I might even go as far as to say that no film has made psychological horror/thrillers good ever, either.

If there is something i dislike more than coming home to find a hobo rubbing his balls all over my bed, it's the japanese influence on a game. Yes, their stock characters, clichees and TERRIBLE TERRIBLE dialog writing/voice acting is what made me have to FORCE myself through Silent Hill 2, damn well trying to enjoy the story and get immersed, but i failed immensively. Maybe if i had played it when i came out, i would actually have enjoyed it, but that's probably because i was 10 at the time.

You all just wait until i can cough up the dough to keep a dev team afloat, and release an immersive psychological horror game that will redefine the genre and piss on your dead cat.

yes, this is what we should assume is going to happen. that, or nobody will buy it because people generally don't support the good games (a lá grim fandango).

Didn't like this one. A year old game I had never heard of, and it was apparently a meritless piece of trash. Since this is where I come for reviews I'd rather see newer stuff so I can get an idea of what to avoid.

xqxm:In my honest opinion, no game has made horror/psychological thriller GOOD. I might even go as far as to say that no film has made psychological horror/thrillers good ever, either.

If there is something i dislike more than coming home to find a hobo rubbing his balls all over my bed, it's the japanese influence on a game. Yes, their stock characters, clichees and TERRIBLE TERRIBLE dialog writing/voice acting is what made me have to FORCE myself through Silent Hill 2, damn well trying to enjoy the story and get immersed, but i failed immensively. Maybe if i had played it when i came out, i would actually have enjoyed it, but that's probably because i was 10 at the time.

You all just wait until i can cough up the dough to keep a dev team afloat, and release an immersive psychological horror game that will redefine the genre and piss on your dead cat.

yes, this is what we should assume is going to happen. that, or nobody will buy it because people generally don't support the good games (a lá grim fandango).

xqxm:In my honest opinion, no game has made horror/psychological thriller GOOD. I might even go as far as to say that no film has made psychological horror/thrillers good ever, either.

If there is something i dislike more than coming home to find a hobo rubbing his balls all over my bed, it's the japanese influence on a game. Yes, their stock characters, clichees and TERRIBLE TERRIBLE dialog writing/voice acting is what made me have to FORCE myself through Silent Hill 2, damn well trying to enjoy the story and get immersed, but i failed immensively. Maybe if i had played it when i came out, i would actually have enjoyed it, but that's probably because i was 10 at the time.

You all just wait until i can cough up the dough to keep a dev team afloat, and release an immersive psychological horror game that will redefine the genre and piss on your dead cat.

yes, this is what we should assume is going to happen. that, or nobody will buy it because people generally don't support the good games (a lá grim fandango).

bye.

Also, Grim Fandango wasn't all that perfict, so suck it.

Name one game that has done horror right?

Seeing as how you don't think Grim Fandango was one of the best games ever, i'm half expecting you to bring up some shitty asshat game like Dead Space, so congratulations for proving to me that some people actually shouldn't be allowed to partake in popular votes.

Cheers!

p.s. I think even you can agree that Grim Fandango was several steps above for example NHL 1999 in the great order of things, but people will rather stick with safe, familiar immensively product placed and sold out games, than to try something that's a little off. I think that's sad, that's all.

Ah forgot one other thing, if your reading this Yahtzee that "fans are cling complaining dipshits.." clip at the end has gotten redundant and annoying, can you please switch back to the old, silent ad for the ZP t shirts?

xqxm:In my honest opinion, no game has made horror/psychological thriller GOOD. I might even go as far as to say that no film has made psychological horror/thrillers good ever, either.

If there is something i dislike more than coming home to find a hobo rubbing his balls all over my bed, it's the japanese influence on a game. Yes, their stock characters, clichees and TERRIBLE TERRIBLE dialog writing/voice acting is what made me have to FORCE myself through Silent Hill 2, damn well trying to enjoy the story and get immersed, but i failed immensively. Maybe if i had played it when i came out, i would actually have enjoyed it, but that's probably because i was 10 at the time.

You all just wait until i can cough up the dough to keep a dev team afloat, and release an immersive psychological horror game that will redefine the genre and piss on your dead cat.

yes, this is what we should assume is going to happen. that, or nobody will buy it because people generally don't support the good games (a lá grim fandango).

bye.

Also, Grim Fandango wasn't all that perfict, so suck it.

Name one game that has done horror right?

Seeing as how you don't think Grim Fandango was one of the best games ever, i'm half expecting you to bring up some shitty asshat game like Dead Space, so congratulations for proving to me that some people actually shouldn't be allowed to partake in popular votes.

Cheers!

p.s. I think even you can agree that Grim Fandango was several steps above for example NHL 1999 in the great order of things, but people will rather stick with safe, familiar immensively product placed and sold out games, than to try something that's a little off. I think that's sad, that's all.

Calling Grim Fandango a 'ze best game ever' has as much solid ground as calling Uwe Boll a movie genius, because there's no such thing as a perfect game, get it trough your heads. Grim Fandago suffered from two annoyings things; one being the fucking controls, two that this game was mostly based on grabbing every object you have and using it in hopes it'll work. I'm sorry, but that doesn' make the game great, it makes it irrataiting and just based on dumb luck, because you'll never think of using any of the objects you have, because it's logically stupid. Like drinking gold made liquir to get a metal detector, or say using balloons filled with strange liquid to destroy a machien. You woulden't think of this, because again, it's illogical. If I want a real puzzle based game I'll play Siberia, but Grim Fandango just makes you relay on dumb luck, that's not a puzzle game, that's just embarrasing.

Second I could bring alot of games, but I'll choose games like Penumbra wich tried to focus more on horror rather than combat. You had to hide from the monsters, rather than killing 'em, all the stuff you used had a point/reason of doing it, the game didn't even relay on jump scares like say Dead Space, but it had abit of this mental fuckery later on, wich actually was really good. But what made it really fun to play is that, you know your up against some weird creatures, or something like that.

I downloaded the demo off of PSN and gave it a try. Of course it was insufferably short, and didn't even show off the 2nd person aspect. I don't think I'll be venturing any more into the game, as I can't even rent it and would have to go all in and buy it all or episode packages. A somewhat intriguing game, but I was never big on Adventure games (which is too bad because I love engrossing stories) nor do I like paying for ones where I have to let Gamefaqs guide me through that game's particular moon logic.

yourbeliefs:I downloaded the demo off of PSN and gave it a try. Of course it was insufferably short, and didn't even show off the 2nd person aspect. I don't think I'll be venturing any more into the game, as I can't even rent it and would have to go all in and buy it all or episode packages. A somewhat intriguing game, but I was never big on Adventure games (which is too bad because I love engrossing stories) nor do I like paying for ones where I have to let Gamefaqs guide me through that game's particular moon logic.

Actually, the game is not that hard. You won't Gamefaqs to complete it)

Wow... see, this is exactly why I ignore most of these threads. And it isn't just Spyalt, although he was certainly a good part of it. People keep saying stuff like "Hur hur hur, awesome review" but I get the feeling they say that for EVERY review he does. Likewise, I'm seeing people who are contradicting themselves saying "This was a good review, it's just a shame Yahtzee only does videos for games he can't play." Because clearly, he sucks so badly at a game that he can't beat it, even though he gave away part of the ending in the freaking review!

My gods the ammount of anger and hatred his reviews spring forth. If anyone actually believes that his reviews are just for humour/entertainment and aren't actually reviews, then they're either very ignorant or aren't very observant. Yahtzee's reviews are, by and large, meant to be entertaining, this is very true. However, he's also generally being quite honest as to his opinion of the games, and their flaws. I have played probably half of the games he's reviewed and I agree whole-heartedly with him on almost all of them. The ones I haven't played myself, I've seen enough of (through friends or simply what I've seen of the gameplay) to know that he's pretty spot-on with those as well.

Just because the guy dislikes a game someone thinks is "the shit" or whatever kids say these days, doesn't mean he sucks at games, and it doesn't mean he's a hack with nothing going besides the humour. He's making a freaking point, and if you can't step back and look at what it is he's saying, you're either too blind to admit that it isn't perfect, or you're in self denial.

Also, the "if you think it's bad it is only because you suck" argument is really pathetic. Do you seriously think that people honestly always hate something because they suck at it? So... you're saying that I hate MGS 2 because I suck at it? Not because it had terrible writing and a lot of unnecessarilly confusing plot points? Or that I dislike MZM because I can't play it? Despite the fact the end of the game is part of the reason I dislike it? That sounds an awful lot like someone who says "if you don't like a book/movie it's because you can't understand it." Wow, thanks for saying that. I'm so glad to know that the reason I dislike Saw is because I don't understand what is so fun and amusing about mindless gore and poorly written scripts.

..sorry, went off on a tangent there.

ANYWAYS.. the review. I enjoyed the review, mainly because I can agree with him on several points. Not because I've played Siren Blood Curse, but because I've seen them done in other games and know the feeling. Escorting someone who dies anyways, being unable to figure out what the hell you're supposed to do when everything just gets you killed, broken and confusing storylines that make little sense until you've seen someone else piece it all together and try to explain it... Watching him comment about the endless dying from wrong choices reminded me of an old PSX game called Dead End 13 or Brain Dead 13 or something like that... it was by and large a cinematic game, which I usually enjoy, but about half-way through it got to the point where nothing I did got me to the next room, so I eventually gave up.

EDIT: I meant to also say that even though the review didn't make me laugh my ass off, like some of them do, I still really enjoyed it. He made a lot of valid points.

Hiroshi Mishima:Wow... see, this is exactly why I ignore most of these threads. And it isn't just Spyalt, although he was certainly a good part of it. People keep saying stuff like "Hur hur hur, awesome review" but I get the feeling they say that for EVERY review he does. Likewise, I'm seeing people who are contradicting themselves saying "This was a good review, it's just a shame Yahtzee only does videos for games he can't play." Because clearly, he sucks so badly at a game that he can't beat it, even though he gave away part of the ending in the freaking review!

My gods the ammount of anger and hatred his reviews spring forth. If anyone actually believes that his reviews are just for humour/entertainment and aren't actually reviews, then they're either very ignorant or aren't very observant. Yahtzee's reviews are, by and large, meant to be entertaining, this is very true. However, he's also generally being quite honest as to his opinion of the games, and their flaws. I have played probably half of the games he's reviewed and I agree whole-heartedly with him on almost all of them. The ones I haven't played myself, I've seen enough of (through friends or simply what I've seen of the gameplay) to know that he's pretty spot-on with those as well.

Just because the guy dislikes a game someone thinks is "the shit" or whatever kids say these days, doesn't mean he sucks at games, and it doesn't mean he's a hack with nothing going besides the humour. He's making a freaking point, and if you can't step back and look at what it is he's saying, you're either too blind to admit that it isn't perfect, or you're in self denial.

Also, the "if you think it's bad it is only because you suck" argument is really pathetic. Do you seriously think that people honestly always hate something because they suck at it? So... you're saying that I hate MGS 2 because I suck at it? Not because it had terrible writing and a lot of unnecessarilly confusing plot points? Or that I dislike MZM because I can't play it? Despite the fact the end of the game is part of the reason I dislike it? That sounds an awful lot like someone who says "if you don't like a book/movie it's because you can't understand it." Wow, thanks for saying that. I'm so glad to know that the reason I dislike Saw is because I don't understand what is so fun and amusing about mindless gore and poorly written scripts.

..sorry, went off on a tangent there.

ANYWAYS.. the review. I enjoyed the review, mainly because I can agree with him on several points. Not because I've played Siren Blood Curse, but because I've seen them done in other games and know the feeling. Escorting someone who dies anyways, being unable to figure out what the hell you're supposed to do when everything just gets you killed, broken and confusing storylines that make little sense until you've seen someone else piece it all together and try to explain it... Watching him comment about the endless dying from wrong choices reminded me of an old PSX game called Dead End 13 or Brain Dead 13 or something like that... it was by and large a cinematic game, which I usually enjoy, but about half-way through it got to the point where nothing I did got me to the next room, so I eventually gave up.

EDIT: I meant to also say that even though the review didn't make me laugh my ass off, like some of them do, I still really enjoyed it. He made a lot of valid points.

Gave away the ending...Please, there's a thing called youtube and wikipedia. Ya don't have to be a genius to look that shit up.

If Yahztee in all his douchebaggery is a reviewer, than George Bush is Hitlers reincarnation. He doesn't review/make a point, he goes on a fucking bash spree/overhype ride, because he belives he knows about games, while he knows shit. By the looks of it, I'll say that he didn't even play the original Siren for the PS2 wich was by far worse, also with him bringing all these points, any person with half a skull who played the PS2 version, can counter him. He doesn't make a point, he just rants like a fucking idiot, and by far we have thousand of thoes on youtube. I know that there isn't anything like a perfect game, everyone person who's IQ isn't below 25 knows that. But Yahztee brings points wich again can be countered. He was never 'spot on', I don't care what any of the sheep or people say, all of his reviews are just a simple rant sprees, with each point can be countered by logical answers. Also if you actually liked Saw, then you deserve to be shot.

That's because since gaming turned into a pop-culture phenomenon and it got a mainstream audience, the majority of gamers are borderline brain-dead. They tend to forget that game reviews are supposed to be a buyer's guide to help you choose between the different titles and not the place where they'll indulge their fanboy fantasies. All reviews contrary to popular opinion tend to bring that much hatred, but Yahtzee's even more, because of the style.

And here's what I don't get; if people don't like the reviews, why are they still here? When I realized that IGN had turned to shit, I stopped going there. I didn't join their forums and started bashing them for the shits n' giggles.

Great review gave me a good idea as to the main points of a game I had never heard of until today. Wasn't my favourite review, definitely dissuaded me from even considering getting it.

I don't mind linear gameplay, as long as there is some significant plot line to support it, but by the impression I received this storyline was about as well supported as roller coaster supports with all the bolts removed and grease added for extra stability.

Although having abstained from this obvious nugget of gaming gold. I can understand the feeling, in a survival horror game, if I'm forced by the arbitrary gameplay to engage in the saving, or protection of a certain character, the game should make me connect with that character so that when I see a suspicious zombie dragging its carcass towards it I should immediately break out the atomic bomb, or go death or glory charge with the leg of a park bench. Otherwise, I consider the character a mild annoyance, and when said character is beset by the zombie horde I break out the crowbar and draw first blood to the astonishment of surrounding enemies.

Also horror isn't as horrific if you feel there's something to fight for other than the desperate chance of survival if you don't empathise with the reason being lobbed at you across a crowded room.

If Yahztee in all his douchebaggery is a reviewer, than George Bush is Hitlers reincarnation. He doesn't review/make a point, he goes on a fucking bash spree/overhype ride, because he belives he knows about games, while he knows shit. By the looks of it, I'll say that he didn't even play the original Siren for the PS2 wich was by far worse, also with him bringing all these points, any person with half a skull who played the PS2 version, can counter him. He doesn't make a point, he just rants like a fucking idiot, and by far we have thousand of thoes on youtube. I know that there isn't anything like a perfect game, everyone person who's IQ isn't below 25 knows that. But Yahztee brings points wich again can be countered. He was never 'spot on', I don't care what any of the sheep or people say, all of his reviews are just a simple rant sprees, with each point can be countered by logical answers. Also if you actually liked Saw, then you deserve to be shot.

Well, why watch it if it causes you that much annoyance, I mean seriously do you not see the irony, you complain about him ranting about a game, in essence you're doing exactly the same.

If there's no doubt in your mind that his reviews are pointless drivel then why bother reading them? So he was never 'spot on' that's part of being human. I mean I accept he gets it wrong goes on a rant, but he's slated some of my favourite games and I've still given my attention because as far as I'm concerned everyone's opinion is valid. You can learn from what he says even if you believe most of it is drivel.

Furthermore you reiterate that his points can be countered, well given experience of quite a few objective viewpoints in my time, you learn that any opinion can be countered. This is principally because it's your personal opinion so there will always be points to counter others. But if you read reviews you usually have a purpose and if that is to decide what game to buy next you have to see the review from an impartial manner, otherwise if you instantly prejudice yourself against it, you gain absolutely NOTHING from watching it.

Also when you present an argument don't just rant against the subject, give another side of the argument, otherwise no-one takes you as seriously as they should and valid points don't get across. This is a technique used on many an occasion by Yahtzee, good and bad it gives your argument gravitas.

Why must people bash on Yahtzee like this? Not to add to the argument, but why is it that people always have something to say along the lines of "he doesn't know jack shit, all his points are valid and he isn't even funny", why take things so literal? Just check the television for christ's sakes, they have entire television serieses dedicated to making fun of life at home. "that's not how life really is", yet it attracts HUGE audiences. It is obviously apparent that this kind of stuff is made because people LIKE it, and it's this kind of stuff that I would watch. I don't know about you, but when I went to go see Dark Knight, I never once thought to myself "criminals never do that and people could never pull off the things Batman manages".

I highly doubt that.Think of it as the Frank Zappa syndrome.In an interview a audience member said "I love your music, but your recent album wasn't that good for..."Zappa responds with his voice dripping with sarcasm "Nothing makes me happier than pleasing you with my music."

dianno:It's amazing people haven't heard of this...it's pretty much the best survival horror game since Silent Hill 2.

I respectfully disagree.:) I played Siren on the ps2, and returned it the same day. I played Siren on the PS3, and was glad it was just the demo. I didn't expect Yahtzee to review this one, but I can at least agree with what he wrote. I can also respect that he bared through the whole game. That's more than I could do!

Sight Jacking was a great idea! There just wasn't near enough information that accompanied it to make it any less confusing. In Siren PS2, there were these zombie snipers that were freakin' crack shots. I didn't know where they were though. I'd sight jack them, and I knew even less. I'd have to gamble with my own life to see what angle they were looking at me from before they shot me. Also, voice acting was ass. :)

I'm impressed people can enjoy the game. More power to you, if you can. Someone has to.

If Yahztee in all his douchebaggery is a reviewer, than George Bush is Hitlers reincarnation. He doesn't review/make a point, he goes on a fucking bash spree/overhype ride, because he belives he knows about games, while he knows shit. By the looks of it, I'll say that he didn't even play the original Siren for the PS2 wich was by far worse, also with him bringing all these points, any person with half a skull who played the PS2 version, can counter him. He doesn't make a point, he just rants like a fucking idiot, and by far we have thousand of thoes on youtube. I know that there isn't anything like a perfect game, everyone person who's IQ isn't below 25 knows that. But Yahztee brings points wich again can be countered. He was never 'spot on', I don't care what any of the sheep or people say, all of his reviews are just a simple rant sprees, with each point can be countered by logical answers. Also if you actually liked Saw, then you deserve to be shot.

Well, why watch it if it causes you that much annoyance, I mean seriously do you not see the irony, you complain about him ranting about a game, in essence you're doing exactly the same.

If there's no doubt in your mind that his reviews are pointless drivel then why bother reading them? So he was never 'spot on' that's part of being human. I mean I accept he gets it wrong goes on a rant, but he's slated some of my favourite games and I've still given my attention because as far as I'm concerned everyone's opinion is valid. You can learn from what he says even if you believe most of it is drivel.

Furthermore you reiterate that his points can be countered, well given experience of quite a few objective viewpoints in my time, you learn that any opinion can be countered. This is principally because it's your personal opinion so there will always be points to counter others. But if you read reviews you usually have a purpose and if that is to decide what game to buy next you have to see the review from an impartial manner, otherwise if you instantly prejudice yourself against it, you gain absolutely NOTHING from watching it.

Also when you present an argument don't just rant against the subject, give another side of the argument, otherwise no-one takes you as seriously as they should and valid points don't get across. This is a technique used on many an occasion by Yahtzee, good and bad it gives your argument gravitas.

The reason I watch is because I wanna know will he ever bring a valid point bout a game, the only time he did that was when he did Halo Wars. All othere stuff doesn't have a valid point.

The problem here is that when Yahtzee yells that his a reviewer, I expect a review, not a rant on a game. I can't learn anything from him, because all the points he states bout a game are either really weak and can be countered or points that don't exactly mean much. For example, when he did RE5, when he said that your partner doesn't use anything except her pistol. That can be countered by saying that if you order her to attack, she'll switch to whatever weapon you gave her. Apperantly he either didn't know that or didn't even try to find out.

I know that no one will take me seriously, but can someone actually take these guys seriously who defend Yahtzee with so much passion, like he actually even cares for it? No, not really, I mean he doesn' give a shit because he already has an ego the size of Alaska.